Bulletin of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
ISSN 1829-006X
2025; 388–396
Shared with The Gufo

A COMPARISON OF FULL ARCH TRUENESS AND PRECISION OF THREE INTRA-ORAL DIGITAL SCANNERS

Ahmed Ali Ahmed*, Dara Saeed, Saud Othman

Department of Restorative Dentistry Erbil, Iraq, Khanzad Teaching Center. Iraq, · Conservative Dentistry Faculty of Dentistry- Kurdistan Higher Council of Medical Specialties. Iraq, · Conservative Dentistry Faculty of Dentistry- Kurdistan Higher Council of Medical Specialties. Iraq

Received: 2026-04-08 · Published: 2025-10-18

© 2025 The Author(s) and the original publisher.

CC BY-NC 4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Shared article.
Original title
A COMPARISON OF FULL ARCH TRUENESS AND PRECISION OF THREE INTRA-ORAL DIGITAL SCANNERS
Authors
Ahmed Ali Ahmed, Dara Saeed, Saud Othman
Source journal
Bulletin of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
Published
2025-10-18
Licence
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
Original
https://doi.org/10.58240/1829006X-2025.21.9-388

Abstract

Background and objectives: Precise full-arch digital impressions serve as a cornerstone in achieving predictable outcomes in fixed prosthodontics and implant-supported rehabilitation While intraoral scanners continue to advance, their trueness and precision relative to laboratory scanners remain critical for clinical application. This study aimed to quantitatively compare the trueness and precision of three contemporary intra oral scanner TRIOS 5, Medit i900, and Cameo Elegant 3 with laboratory reference scanner. Materials and Methods: This in vitro study, conducted at Khanzad Teaching Center in Erbil from April to July 2025, assessed the full‑arch trueness and precision of three intraoral scanners against a laboratory scanner as the reference. A standardized maxillary resin model with three predefined inter‑pin distances was scanned, and deviations were analyzed using 3D metrology software. Results: Across D1, D2, and D3, all intraoral scanners showed mean deviations within approximately 0.2–0.5% of the laboratory reference values. The laboratory scanner consistently demonstrated the lowest variability (<0.1%), while Comeo Elegant 3 exhibited the highest range of variation (up to ~0.4%). Overall, 3Shape TRIOS 5 and Medit i900 maintained deviations within clinically acceptable limits, though Medit i900 showed slightly lower trueness for certain distances. Conclusions: The laboratory scanner demonstrated superior trueness and precision. Among IOS devices, TRIOS 5 outperformed Mediti900 and Cameo Elegant 3, confirming the established accuracy hierarchy and emphasizing selection based on clinical application.
1 / ? 100% Open in new tab Download Cite

Loading the full text…

Download Follow Updates